Crime
and Justice in the United States
and in England and Wales, 1981-96

Notes on figures 19-24: Data compiled by courts nationwide (State,
Federal and juvenile courts in the United States; juvenile and adult courts
in England) formed the basis for the conviction rate, defined for all
offenses except rape as the number of persons convicted during the year
per 1,000 population age 10 or older. (Age 10 is the minimum conviction
age in England. No U.S. minimum exists, but rarely do juvenile court referrals
involve children under age 10 (25,000 out of 1.5 million cases in 1994
according to Loeber and Farrington, 1998, page 24.)) For rape, the conviction
rate is the number of convictions per 1,000 male population (ages
10 or older), since rape is almost exclusively a crime committed by males.
In the United States, convicted juveniles were defined as adjudicated
delinquents, excluding those dismissed or transferred to adult court.
(Transferred juveniles who were convicted as adults in adult court were
included in State court cases.) Since 1986, national conviction data in
the United States have been compiled every 2 years. National conviction
data in England are compiled annually. However, for comparability, English
convictions are shown for years in which crime victim surveys were conducted.
U.S. convictions are shown for all years in which national data exist
or were estimated. Convictions for vehicle theft in the United States
are conservatively estimated. Crime definitions for the graphics are given
in Notes on figures 5-10.

Depending on the circumstances, a person charged in the United States
with a serious crime can be prosecuted in a State court, a Federal court,
or a juvenile court. Likewise in England (including Wales), depending
on the circumstances, the case can go to the Crown Court, a magistrate
court, or a juvenile court (a specialized magistrate court).

U.S. Federal courts treat persons 18 years of age and older as adults.
In the vast majority of States, a defendant is considered an adult once
he or she reaches the age of 18; in a small number of States, age 17 is
the beginning of adulthood; in a few States it is age 16. In England,
adulthood in the eyes of the law begins at age 18. Before 1992, it was
age 17.

In both countries, a juvenile charged with or previously found delinquent
of a serious crime can be prosecuted in the adult court rather than the
juvenile court. In America, State and Federal laws define special circumstances
in which adult prosecution of a juvenile is automatic (for example, a
juvenile charged with murder, rape, or armed robbery), and circumstances
in which such prosecution is at the discretion of either the juvenile
court or the prosecutor. English law requires that all juveniles charged
with homicide be prosecuted in the Crown Court (the adult court) rather
than the juvenile court (called the youth court in England). If the crime
is not a homicide but is one that is punishable by at least 14 years confinement
for an adult (for example, household burglary), or the crime is carried
out with an adult accomplice, the English juvenile court, at its discretion,
can commit the juvenile for trial in the Crown Court. Commitment for trial
in the Crown Court is distinguished from commitment for sentencing in
the Crown Court. When a juvenile is convicted in the English juvenile
court but the magistrate believes the juvenile deserves a longer sentence
than the maximum that the juvenile court can impose (12 months), the juvenile
can be committed to the Crown Court for sentencing. In such a case the
maximum sentence the Crown Court can impose is 2 years.

The total number of convictions (juvenile and adult combined) in the
United States is not directly comparable to the English total because
the U.S. population is far larger than the English population. Naturally
the United States has more convictions: it has roughly five times more
people than England. A more meaningful comparison is between conviction
rates per 1,000 population, a measure that takes into account the
difference in population size.

The U.S. conviction rate per 1,000 population is higher than England's
for murder, rape, and robbery. Is that because the United States has higher
rates of victimization from murder, rape, and robbery? Or because the
criminal justice system in the United States is more likely than the English
system to catch and convict murderers, rapists, and robbers?

The higher U.S. conviction rate for murder is explained entirely
by the higher U.S. murder rate. According to the most recent statistics
on crime (1996) and the justice system (1994 in the United States, 1995
in England), the U.S. murder rate is nearly six times the English murder
rate (figure 5). Correspondingly, the U.S. murder conviction rate per
1,000 population is nearly six times England's (.059 versus .010) (figure
19).

The higher U.S. conviction rate for rape is attributable both
to the higher U.S. police-recorded rape rate and to a United States criminal
justice system that catches and convicts rapists at a higher rate than
England's system. According to the most recent statistics on crime (1996)
and the justice system (1994 in the United States, 1995 in England), the
U.S. police-recorded rape rate is three times England's (figure 5), but
the U.S. rape conviction rate is over eight times England's (.212 versus
.025) (figure 20), indicating that a rape in the United States is more
likely to lead to conviction than one in England.

The higher U.S. conviction rate for robbery cannot be attributed
to a higher U.S. robbery victimization rate since, according to the latest
figures, the U.S. robbery victimization rate is lower than England's.
Instead the reason for the higher U.S. robbery conviction rate is that
the English criminal justice system is less likely than America's to catch
and convict robbers. According to the most recent statistics on robbery
victimization (1995) and the criminal justice system (1994 in the United
States, 1995 in England), the English robbery victimization rate is 1.4
times the U.S. rate (figure 1), but the U.S. robbery conviction rate is
nearly 3 times England's (.30 versus .11) (figure 21), indicating that
a robbery in the United States is more likely to lead to conviction than
one in England.

The English conviction rate per 1,000 population is higher than
the U.S. conviction rate for assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft.
Is that because England has higher rates of victimization from assault,
burglary, and motor vehicle theft? Or because the criminal justice system
in England is more likely than the U.S. system to catch and convict
assaulters, burglars, and motor vehicle thieves?

The higher English conviction rate for assault is attributable
to a higher English assault victimization rate, not to different performance
by the English justice system. According to the most recent statistics
on assault victimization (1995), the English assault victimization rate
is 2.3 times the U.S. rate (figure 2). However, according to the most
recent conviction statistics (1994 in the United States, 1995 in England),
the English assault conviction rate is 1.4 times the U.S. assault conviction
rate (.61 versus .44) (figure 22), indicating that an assault in England
is less likely to lead to conviction than one in the United States.

The higher English conviction rate for burglary is attributable
to a higher English crime rate for burglary, not to different performance
by the English justice system. According to the most recent statistics
on burglary victimization (1995), the English burglary victimization rate
is 1.8 times the U.S. rate (figure 3). However, according to the most
recent conviction statistics (1994 in the United States, 1995 in England),
the English burglary conviction rate is 1.1 times the U.S. burglary conviction
rate (.78 versus .73) (figure 23), indicating that a burglary in England
is less likely to lead to conviction than one in the United States.

The higher English conviction rate for motor vehicle theft is
attributable to a higher English crime rate for motor vehicle theft, not
to different performance by the English justice system. According to the
most recent statistics on motor vehicle theft victimization (1995), the
English motor vehicle theft victimization rate is 2.2 times the U.S. rate
(figure 4). However, according to the most recent conviction statistics
(1994 in the United States, 1995 in England), the English motor vehicle
theft conviction rate is 1.6 times the U.S. conviction rate (.34 versus
.21) (figure 24), indicating that a motor vehicle theft in England is
less likely to lead to conviction than one in the United States.

Have conviction rates per 1,000 population been rising or falling
in each country?

From 1981 to the latest year of conviction data (1994 in the United
States, 1995 in England) --

The U.S. murder conviction rate rose steeply (.045 in 1981
rising to .059 in 1994), while the English rate rose modestly (.009
in 1981 rising to .010 in 1995) (figure 19). Unlike the rise in the
U.S. conviction rate, the rise in the English conviction rate is linked
to an increase in the country's murder rate.

The U.S. rape conviction rate rose sharply (.099 in 1981
rising to .212 in 1995), while the English rate rose comparatively
modestly (.015 in 1981 rising to .025 in 1995) (figure 20). Unlike
the rise in the U.S. conviction rate, the rise in the English conviction
rate could partly be explained by an increase in the country's rape
rate, although the increase in the English rape rate (more than 5
times) was far higher than the modest increase in the rape conviction
rate.

Both the U.S. (.28 in 1981 rising to .30 in 1994) and the English
(.10 in 1981 rising to .11 in 1995) robbery conviction rates
increased slightly (figure 21). The U.S. conviction rate modestly
rose while the robbery victimization rate fell. In England, by contrast,
the conviction rate rose modestly while the robbery victimization
rate soared.

The U.S. assault conviction rate rose sharply (.16 in 1981
rising to .44 in 1994), while the English rate fell sharply (1.12
in 1981 falling to .61 in 1995) (figure 22). The rise in the U.S.
conviction rate was accompanied by a decline in the assault victimization
rate. By contrast, the decline in the English conviction rate was
accompanied by a steep rise in the assault victimization rate.

Both the U.S. (.97 in 1981 falling to .73 in 1994) and the English
(1.69 in 1981 falling to .78 in 1995) burglary conviction rates
fell, and the English rate fell more than the U.S. rate (figure 23).
The falling English rate was accompanied by a steep rise in the burglary
victimization rate. The falling U.S. conviction rate was accompanied
by a steep decline in the burglary victimization rate. However, the
conviction rate decline was less steep than the victimization rate
decline, indicating that the risk of burglary conviction was actually
rising in the United States during the period.

The U.S. motor vehicle theft conviction rate rose sharply
(.07 in 1981 rising to .21 in 1994), while the English rate fell sharply
(.83 in 1981 falling to .34 in 1995) (figure 24). The rising U.S.
conviction rate was accompanied by a stable victimization rate for
vehicle theft. By contrast, the falling English conviction rate was
accompanied by a rising victimization rate for vehicle theft.